Skip to page content
Power & PoliticsUnited States edition
Sections
Only your five-digit ZIP code is sent. We never ask for your address.
Independent · nonpartisan
Illustrative anonymous person approaching a public clerk intake window
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC

In Re: Hopeman Brothers Inc.

No. 020518Supreme Court of Virginia

020518 In Re: Hopeman Brothers Inc. 09/18/2002 Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus, the Court is of opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandamus because…

The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.
01
The caption

The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.

02
The activity

Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.

03
The source

The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.

Current update

020518 In Re: Hopeman Brothers Inc. 09/18/2002 Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus, the Court is of opinion t…

At a glance
Court
Supreme Court of Virginia
First added here
October 4, 2026
Last entry
September 18, 2002
Policy at issue

No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.

Official docket

Case timeline

The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.

Docket entry

020518 In Re: Hopeman Brothers Inc. 09/18/2002 Upon consideration of the petition for writ of mandamus, the Court is of opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a writ of mandamus because petitioner failed to establish a clear and specific legal right to be enforced, or a duty which ought to be and can be performed and that there is no other specific and adequate legal remedy. (Published ORDER)

Open court document ↗

Rulings in this case over time

Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.

No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.

Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed; 1 such entry was left out of this case. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket